Where to for Super Rugby?

[I like to watch]

Spend a 109M Euros pa on grassroots & provincial Rugby.....
How the fuck?

We are so behind the rest of the world.......

 

[Rebels3]

Those 6 nations £€$ are massive.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Spend a 109M Euros pa on grassroots & provincial Rugby...
How the fuck?

We are so behind the rest of the world...

It's not pa - must be over 10 years or similar.

They expensed about 10m pa over the last few years on "domestic and community rugby" in their annual report - still way more than RA

Irfu only generate around 70m euros each year in total

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[Quick Hands]

Spend a 109M Euros pa on grassroots & provincial Rugby...
How the fuck?

We are so behind the rest of the world...

Management and culture.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

It's behind the paywall, so I've taken the liberty of posting the whole article.

Each week, the debate continues, with the focus on Super Rugby and the continuing failure of Australian teams to make any impact of note on the competition.
I will have something to say about the whole Super Rugby concept at a later date, but to put it in the most succinct way, and from a purely selfish Australian Rugby point of view, the Super Rugby competition has to go.
The manifestations of the kind of problems I’ve been articulating are everywhere and the Super Rugby competition won’t assist in resolving any of them.
On the contrary, without urgent changes, the problems and the results will get worse.
You have only to take the once-powerful Gordon Rugby Club in the Sydney Shute Shield competition.
After eight rounds, they have lost seven of their games. They have had 443 points scored against them, an average of just over 55 points a game. Last week, they lost 97-14 to Northern Suburbs.
Their only win was against Penrith, who’ve since been dumped from the Shute Shield for bad performances.
Gordon’s lower grades have been similarly dismantled. And they were flogged by huge margins in 2017.
This is a famous club, which has been a powerhouse of Australian rugby since 1936.
They have won eight first grade premierships, 12 club championships.
They have produced 34 Wallabies, including four captains — Trevor Allan, Bob Davidson, Peter Sullivan and Stirling Mortlock.
And they have produced other great Australian rugby names — Jim Phipps, Arthur Summons, Rod Batterham, Laurie Monaghan, Steve Cutler, Andrew Blades, Tony Dempsey.
Rugby Australia hasn’t a clue about these issues, nor does it offer any solutions.
Just keep drifting along.
But where are future NSW and Wallaby teams going to come from if clubs such as Gordon are fighting for their very future?
Or is the answer to send them into the same rugby oblivion that has been dished out to Penrith?
I had a note from a regional headmaster in relation to a recent Sydney club game between Easts and Parramatta. They played at Orange.
He writes: “The crowd was incredibly disappointing. No one knew it was on. Solution for a huge crowd? Give a free family ticket and post it to every school kid in Orange and include a sausage sandwich and a free can of drink. They bring mum and dad. Mum and dad will pay for theirs. It would barely be a $500 exercise. It’s not rocket science. It would only need Castle and co. to donate 1 per cent of their wage to pay the bill. I keep the faith, but I fear rugby union in Oz is getting close to terminal illness time.”
Another reader writes: “I was at the Brumbies v Rebels game on Saturday night and, dear God, what a world of hurt Australian rugby is in. There was no atmosphere. I mean none. The game was on the line and, honestly, nobody cared.
“The issue isn’t isolated to Brumbies games. It starts at the top and filters down. Having said that, it did seem that the Brumbies organisation had lost interest … I was so disappointed and saddened at what I saw on Saturday night as I remember packing out the mall at Canberra to watch them on the big screen not that long ago. How far from that we now seem.”
And, of course, on the eve of that match, rugby administrators in Canberra were warning the rugby public if they don’t turn up, the club might go under.
Oatley Rugby Club is a little outfit in Sydney, but, writes a lawyer and donor to the club: “The club, like many rugby clubs, is devoid of sources of funding and is facing the reality of years of inept administration of the code by Australian Rugby and NSW Rugby.”
He writes: “I, like many lovers of rugby, am disillusioned by the approach of the administrators of the code in Australia. They are continuing to alienate the true supporters of the code and unless something is done to change this, rugby in Australia will continue to be weakened. It’s not a question of lack of support, as there is a great deal of support for club rugby and subdistrict rugby if the code is properly administered. But that requires proper recognition of the fundamental importance of such clubs and also the need to ensure they are properly funded.
“The failure of the Penrith Rugby Club is just one stark illustration of the real problems facing the code of rugby. One of the most important points made by Alan Jones is the huge increase in the bureaucracy of the administration of the code. It must be kept in mind that these bureaucrats are paid enormous sums of money. The costs involved are such that running a club such as Oatley is not properly addressed with the resultant negative impact upon such clubs.”
All this is easily addressed, by simply ousting the failed Board of Australian Rugby. Put people there who know, listen and want to address these grassroots issues. From the grassroots grows the harvest.
Rugby is owned by its members. The board is elected by its members. What has been done by members can only be undone by them.
If the two big member unions, NSW and Queensland, wanted to, they could convene an extraordinary general meeting, the purpose of which would be to move a vote of no confidence in the Board of Rugby Australia. Then install a new board. Not hard.
But it’s quite clear there is no one within these two powerful member unions with the fire in the belly or the courage or the political nous to marshal the forces. They’re cosy and compliant.
They sat on their hands and allowed the Western Force to be executed. Why? Self-interest.
They thought they’d be the beneficiaries of the demise of the Force — that’s what Rugby Australia told them. More money, more players.
But as one of my correspondents said: “Guess what, no money, no players …”
A revolution is needed, but the members have to bring it on.
By the way, New Zealand did just that in 2002. The incumbent New Zealand Rugby Board lost the co-hosting rights for the Rugby World Cup 2003 to Australia.
They absolutely stuffed up and tried to brush it under the rug. The member unions in New Zealand convened an extraordinary general meeting and sacked the lot.
There are many people in Australia who would make terrific directors.
There are capable and knowledgeable rugby people who have been there, done it and are ready to do it again.
As one young person wrote to me, a young fellow who loves his rugby: “If Donald Trump was an Australian rugby fan, he’d probably be pretty angry. He’d rightfully point out that we don’t win anymore, that we send in weak negotiators. But most importantly, he’d point out that New Zealand and South Africa are ‘nasty guys’ and we should not be nice to them.”
Pretending that SANZAAR has any relevance to Australian Rugby at the moment, given the mess we’re in, and that Super Rugby can continue in its present form, is the ultimate proof that we have weak negotiators and have lost the plot.
Now, in a week’s time, we face Ireland. The “scoreboard” indicates the difficult prospect in front of us, though not impossible. We do have talent.
But the backdrop against which Michael Cheika has to deliver is, at best, unpalatable.
In 2013, Ireland published an outstanding document entitled A Strategic Plan for Irish Rugby.
It was labelled: “Irish Rugby — from grassroots to international success — One Ireland, One Passion, One Goal.”
The report determined that Ireland would:
• Win a Six Nations Championship once every four years — and they won this year’s title, undefeated
• Win the European Championship (the Heineken Cup) by 2018 — they did that this season with Leinster
• Win the Pro 14 European Competition every two years — they did with Connacht in 2015/16 and Leinster this season
• Increase the number of rugby participants to 180,000 by September 2017
• Spend 109 million euros a year on grassroots and provincial rugby
• And that rugby should be based on respect, integrity, inclusivity, fun and excellence
Ireland are now the No 2 side in the world and they copied, of course, what New Zealand’s summit did, as I have written previously, after New Zealand were knocked out in the quarterfinals of the World Cup in 2007.
So the simple, positive point is success need not be elusive. If Ireland, with a small playing population, can do it, so can we with our abundance of playing talent.
Only one thing stands in the way. And increasingly, I think, everyone knows what that is.

We all know Rugby Australia has failed rugby in this country and thorough poor key past decisions are financially in a world of pain.

Yet even with a rich billionaire prepared to bring innovation, passion and much needed major investment in oz and Asia pacific rugby, Rugby Australia drags its feet and fails to seize the opportunity.

Sadly they keep appointing the next board member out of Mosman carpark and so nothing changes with the Rugby Australia board but just a shuffling of the deck chairs of the titanic.

If the oz rugby public was voting for rugby board members, they would all be gone as they have long lost the support of the oz rugby public as they are so lost in their own misaligned view of their own self importance they probably think they can push twiggy and his team around as they know best.

We need a revolution or radical change which to my mind can only happen with Rugby Australia collaborating with twiggy or standing aside. But while we have equal inept major qld and nsw state unions keeping RA and current board in place I don’t like our chances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I see your point about a comp that the outcome is uncertain etc, but having a weaker comp just so Aus teams can win isn't really a comp with integrity is it? I hope something is worked with Twiggy, but as we haven't seen any details of the comp he is running next year, let's not assume it is going to be great either, it maybe a weaker comp but we don't know if it will be better!

He has the money to get the resource to make it work over time - something RA has not had for a long time and at this rate increasingly less likely every year that goes by less likely to have with the pot continuing to shrink.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hoggy]

He has the money to get the resource to make it work over time - something RA has not had for a long time and at this rate increasingly less likely every year that goes by less likely to have with the pot continuing to shrink.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The hard part for twiggy, is going to be creating a competition that has any real meaning. On the surface he is going to be faced with many of the issues that effect Super rugby.
I also can't see how the comp can move forward without more Aussie content. Don't get me wrong I'm not knocking it, its just reality.

 

[dru]

I get so angry and emotional about I'm posting less and less and watching far fewer games of rugby than I ever have.

+1

 

[Joe King]

Perhaps we all have to admit that there is no easy answer. Even on here noone can agree on a better system than Super rugby, there are a lot that think it is broken, but noone has really come up with an idea of a better format. I know some like what Twiggy is doing, but personally I don't know anyone who has watched them play, and that includes mates who usually follow Fiji or Tonga, who I thought would watch their own teams play. I hope something does come out of it, but whatever someone comes up with has to be a realistic comp, with teams that stand on their own feet financially etc. Otherwise the comp will have no integrity.

Got me thinking about how many different models have been suggested. And I think there are maybe only 3-4 models, and the rest are just variations of those:

1. One model would be some version of what we have now, where (almost) all the teams play each other at least once during the regular season. Whether we have conferences where some teams play each other more than once, a round-robin format where all teams play each other only once, or different combinations of (new) teams in different conferences, it all sounds like the same type of model they've had since the beginning.

I would say most kiwis on here and other forums favour this type of model. And why not? It has served them well, and continues to do so. But I would say this is the least favoured model by Aussie fans on here and other forums. And it is falling out of favour with more and more Aussie fans almost every day. Of the Aussie fans who do support it, I would say most of them do so for financial reasons, but actually wish we could afford to have something else (anything else!) instead.

2. Enclosed conferences, where you only play against teams in your own conference during the regular season, with any cross-conferences games only happening after that - either for all teams, or only for the team that qualify for the finals.

3. A trans-tasman comp, which leaves out SA. It seems most Kiwi fans don't like this one much for historical reasons, financial reasons, and now because of 'who-they-would-be-left-playing-against' reasons. While it seems this *use* to be favoured by more Aussie fans, some seem to have gone a bit cold on it now because they've realised our competitiveness would still be an issue... that, and the fact that lot's of kiwis really do despise Aussies after all! (I'm only joking, but not really)

There may also be a trans-tasman comp that includes SA somehow, but this might better fit as a version of model 1 above.

4. A national domestic comp, with or without some sort of champions cup. It seems to me that most Aussie fans on here would favour this type of set up, even if they've not suggested it much for financial (or other) reasons. I'm wondering if there is a consensus developing that this could actually work financially (at least, compared to where Super Rugby would take Australian rugby financially if it keeps going)?

Anyway, I don't want to put words in people's mouths or speak on their behalf. These are just my observations. I could be wrong. Have I left out any other major model that's been suggested?

 

[kiap]

Model 2 is effectively quite similar in format to Model 4a (the version with a champions comp - or comps).

I'd reckon in that case much of the control over each "conference" would go the respective body entering the conference teams.

 

[hoggy]

4. A national domestic comp, with or without some sort of champions cup. It seems to me that most Aussie fans on here would favour this type of set up, even if they've not suggested it much for financial (or other) reasons. I'm wondering if there is a consensus developing that this could actually work financially (at least, compared to where Super Rugby would take Australian rugby financially if it keeps going)?

You have to remember Test revenue of sorts remains. So the trick is can you fund a national domestic competition.

 

[dru]

You have to remember Test revenue of sorts remains. So the trick is can you fund a national domestic competition.

Actually, some of us think that the trick is can we afford not to?

 

[wamberal]

Actually, some of us think that the trick is can we afford not to?

Either way, one thing you can bet on, there will be more critics than supporters.


But, seriously, anything that we do will be flawed, objectively. I have ennumerated our intrinsic problems too many times to do so again. Suffice it to say that we are right up against the wall.

 

[Forcefield]

The hard part for twiggy, is going to be creating a competition that has any real meaning. On the surface he is going to be faced with many of the issues that effect Super rugby.
I also can't see how the comp can move forward without more Aussie content. Don't get me wrong I'm not knocking it, its just reality.

That's the tricky bit- meaning for who? It has plenty of meaning for West Australians. It might not have any means for anyone east of the Nullarbor, but then- why should it? Hopefully, it will also have meaning for those regions that have not had a professional team in the past.

I don't presume to speak for plans for the competition, but a 6-8 team competition where each team is on par that is within a similar time zone and there if free to air coverage sounds good to me. We don't need the rest of Australia to batter an eyelid to make this work.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I think trans Tasman option scuppered because a cross border competition needs mechanisms that a domestic competition can offer to create equalisation of teams. Think afl and their draft system which allowed that to happen- now not advocating draft system to support equalisation of teams but there are other mechanisms which neither nzru or ra showed preparedness to adopt but others like twiggy and team have been fighting for. I would back twiggy and his reforms then nzru and ra imposed bs that is killing our with super crap rugby competition

 

[hoggy]

I think trans Tasman option scuppered because a cross border competition needs mechanisms that a domestic competition can offer to create equalisation of teams. Think afl and their draft system which allowed that to happen- now not advocating draft system to support equalisation of teams but there are other mechanisms which neither nzru or ra showed preparedness to adopt but others like twiggy and team have been fighting for. I would back twiggy and his reforms then nzru and ra imposed bs that is killing our with super crap rugby competition

That's one of the problems with a trans Tasman comp, NZ will still just treat it as a glorified All Black training camp, which means it will still be hard to implement many of the structures required to make the league successful.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

The problem has been NZ has not suffered from the woes of Super Rugby other countries like us and SA have suffered so hence their self interest is they see no need to change anything without any pressure for change.

A trans tasman competition would work if and only if there was changes to put in an equalisation of talent approach to teams involved. Ie open borders policy where any teams with players from other trans tasman countries (with perhaps quota's) and those players still being eligible for AB's or WOB's.

However, for it to be really successful other changes are still needed to grow/attract fan interest in oz given competition from other major codes as don't think alone an open borders policy would be enough as other changes required to compete for fans in a crowded sports market. Hence, other innovations Twiggy ball acting on in terms of creating a better entertainment package, rule changes etc is the way to go as well. As need to be ahead of the innovation curve and follow what Cricket Australia done in creating more appealing new cricket products like Big Bash etc.

Clearly working with twiggy has to be key part of this as well given what he and his team (and financial resources) can offer......as well as including other teams like PI/Fiji teams, as well as keeping Japanese team in it (Wild Knights or Sunwolves)...and perhaps with same principles Twiggy's team seeking for WSR that any AB or WOB playing for those teams (with quota's) eligible for national teams etc.

 

[half]

I think this belongs in this thread. It clearly demonstrates the pull of national teams and this ad / vid, attempts to tie the national team to the A-league. As he look to the sky opens his arms and says aloud our management [management describes their titles and in no way do I imply they do actually manage] yes our management kinda can’t do this as we don’t have that local team.

Hyundai have produced an add that ties the A-League which they sponsor to the world cup and the Socceroos. When I saw this on youtube this morning I through if only ??????? this illustrates perfectly how a sponsor can add additional support and how as a code you can offer you core sponsors this. If only, if only, if only, we had a competition that could be used by sponsors like this.

I guess this is aimed more at millennials. What it does is have players write to their mentors thanking them.

Advertising types call this levering and piggy backing. But it’s really well done. Shows how you can tie a national domestic competition to rep levels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=367&v=Bnmw8SZlQ9A

 

[Joe King]

At this time of year, you can sense how much influence the Wallabies have in getting the rugby community excited.

What ever form Super Rugby takes from 2020, I think RA will look to keep test rugby front and centre from July onwards (with TRC directly following the Inbounds). And whatever form the next tier takes, they will look to fit it into 'the end of feb - end of June' time-slot, which is about 17-18 weeks tops. This might make it tricky to fit a full home and away domestic comp + a champions cup on top of that. Or am i missing something?

 

[hoggy]

At this time of year, you can sense how much influence the Wallabies have in getting the rugby community excited.

What ever form Super Rugby takes from 2020, I think RA will look to keep test rugby front and centre from July onwards (with TRC directly following the Inbounds). And whatever form the next tier takes, they will look to fit it into 'the end of feb - end of June' time-slot, which is about 17-18 weeks tops. This might make it tricky to fit a full home and away domestic comp + a champions cup on top of that. Or am i missing something?

This is the catch 22 the game faces here, yes the Wallabies generate the interest, but the whole set up of the game here essentially ensures this, and how much of that is due to the lack of excitement in Super rugby.

Can the code here seriously expect not just to survive but grow when from July on-wards you are pretty much just playing Test rugby, you can't grow the game from the top down. You may excite your fan base, but your not going to grow it with just Test rugby.

Super rugby from Feb to June & then test rugby from July on-wards is IMO opinion a slow decline to obscurity as we are already witnessing, because neither competitions are designed to attract new fans.